home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: uni-paderborn.de!usenet
- From: laire@basis.owl.de (Ralph Schmidt)
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.programmer
- Subject: Re: FindTask() VERY IMPORTANT
- Date: 11 Mar 1996 17:19:25 GMT
- Organization: Universitaet Paderborn, Germany
- Message-ID: <4i1nat$e5s@news.uni-paderborn.de>
- References: <4i1bja$59t@oak28.doc.ic.ac.uk> <4hfvff$sj6@werple.net.au>?<192.6637T931T2098@academy.bastad.se>?20@ <4hm7qm$otm@news.uni-paderborn.de>?<MlDlTdS00iWS45Xc5x@andrew.cmu.edu>?<4hni69$8ub@tempo.univ-lyon1.fr>?ub@╨
- NNTP-Posting-Host: basis.owl.de
- In-Reply-To: <4i1bja$59t@oak28.doc.ic.ac.uk>
- X-Newsreader: NewsFlash [$Revision: 2.104 $] NF-U-00029
-
- On 03/11/96, Martin Frost wrote:
- >
- >In article <4hni69$8ub@tempo.univ-lyon1.fr>, dscreve@ifhamy (David
- Screve) writes:
- >
- >
- >> Regarding the scheduling code, I think there is no reason
- >>to delete this information. Yes, TCNestID, and such other could be
- >>"Schedule Dependant", but on every multitask OS, there is only one
- task
- >>active on a time (except on multi-processor computer, but this
- problem
- >>can be solved by protecting memory).
- >
- >
- >Anyway, in exec/execbase.[ih], ThisTask is commented as "readable".
- Doesn't
- >this mean we're allowed to read it?
- >
-
- And guess what...in the next major OS Version you won┤t see any
- fields in the execbase.h/.i structure. Rules change.
- And to avoid another senseless debate...yes old 68000 code still can
- use the execbase fields...for powerpc programs it will be forbidden.
- New 68000 code may also use the new API but that depends on the
- availibility of a new 68000 exec module.
-
-
- --
- --
- Ralph Schmidt,laire@popmail.owl.de,NextMail welcome
-